Monday, January 06, 2014

Streaming and its disappointments

While Amazon has orders of magnitude more books than your local bookseller ever had, Netflix probably has fewer movies available for streaming than your local VHS rental store had decades ago.....(Now, Netflix) wants to feed me more and more and more of the same, drawing mainly from a library of second-tier movies and TV shows, and actually making it surprisingly hard to discover the highest-quality content. It’s a bit like what Pandora would be, if Pandora was severely constrained in the songs it could choose from.....Felix Salmon in Reuters(see related: Why do streaming services still suck?)

Ultimately, streaming will conquer the RedBox/Postal Service model for delivery of home video, though I'm not sure that subscription streaming of all top recent DVD releases will ever be priced low enough to be an everyday thing.

As the computer, tablet, phone and home media center converge, the price-point issues will work themselves out and Redbox and Netflix-by-mail will go the way of Blockbuster.

Posted at 02:00:11 PM

Comments

You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

I'm glad you posted this because entertainment-wise, this has been pretty annoying. I have both Netflix services: Blu-Ray DVD by mail (one DVD at a time); and high-def streaming. At this point, it really should just be streaming for everything, but for some reason probably related to rights issues, thousands of films/shows are not available streaming. Or, they are, and then they're yanked off the site with little to no notice (sometimes an "expires on ..." note will show up the website queue but not on other devices).

I suppose I could get by with a DVD-only service, although 1) streaming high-def makes non-Blu-Ray look better than playing a regular DVD on a Blu-Ray machine and 2) series television makes much more sense streaming than split up over DVDs, even though there is plenty of good TV content that is ONLY available on Blu-Ray/DVD (Modern Family is one example). It's just archaic to have to pay for two services when you have the technology to use the one superior service.

I agree that Netflix' choice of top tier movies is fairly weak, and if you're looking for a particular movie it is often quite disappointing when it's not there, which is often, but it is fun when you don't have something particular in mind and just give in to a random choice.

I do find that their selection of documentaries is quite good though, and since I signed up last month I have discovered some great ones, many which I would've never even given the chance if not for the streaming format, which allows you to sample something without any commitment...

One thing I've noticed is that when a premium channel like HBO or Showtime starts running something, it is not available streaming. For example several of the films that were pulled from Netflix streaming on Jan. 1, including Platoon and Being John Malkovich started running on Showtime or Starz or HBO (can't recall which).

Seems ridiculous. You're paying for streaming, which is essentially a premium channel (although admittedly less expensive), but because a movie channel buys that title for whatever duration, you can't stream it ... but you CAN get the DVD in the mail.

Tangentially, some local sports are now moving to premium exclusively too. I'm fairly certain that Wednesday's Blackhawks game vs. the Rangers will be only on NBCS, a pay channel. I may be wrong about that but usually when it's on that channel, it doesn't appear on CSN or anywhere else--even though the game is a sellout. Playoff Blackhawks games are routinely available only on NBCS.

What it boils down to is, there's no way to predict where the content you want will appear, in what format, or for how long. And even if you are selective with your viewing you easily end up paying for more delivery modes than you would otherwise. In other words, the industries would rather screw consumers unnecessarily, when they could be serving the audience and still make plenty of money.

I used to love Netflix when DVD-by-mail was new and the only option, but "the streaming movies are generally second rate" is unfortunately true. To Netflix's discredit, many of those movies are actually deliberately second-rate, i.e. knockoffs of blockbusters. That's where the whole "Sharknado" phenomenon came from. From what I understand the Transformers series has a knockoff series. Netflix shamefully uses titles like that, and B-movies (and worse) to boast about the size of its library. Similar to the way HBO makes a huge deal about running some of the consensus-worst movies of the year (that Adam Sandler atrocity about his son) and selling it like it's some sort of a treasure rather than garbage they got cheap and are running to take up space.

I think Netflix made a big mistake by prioritizing its streaming service over its DVD-by-mail service. The movie studios and television networks will eventually force third parties like Netflix out of the market by charging exorbitant fees for the stuff that people actually want to watch, or by refusing to license it for streaming to third parties at all. That's what HBO is doing - you can only watch new HBO shows by actually subscribing to HBO through your cable provider.

Netflix recognizes this problem, which is why it's tried to create high-quality content of its own, such as Arrested Development, House of Cards, and Orange is the New Black. All of those shows have been pretty well-received, but I doubt that they can drive membership over the long run by competing with HBO to produce content that people want to watch.

The studios and networks can't push out third parties in the DVD-by-mail business because of the first sale doctrine. Netflix could offer a service that is pretty great (basically any movie ever, to your door in a couple of days, for a low monthly fee) that no one could compete with without developing an expensive distribution chain.

I seem to be using Amazon Instant video more than Netflix these days. Amazon has a lot more new releases that are higher quality. (I was able to see BBC shows like Broadchurch and Orphan Black last month, for example.). Sure, you have to pay to rent each item, but the prices aren't that much more than what a VHS tape cost a decade or so ago at the video store. (1 to 4 dollars per movie) Plus, you don't have to leave your home to get them.

I think you have it right. Popular blockbusters are probably too expense to offer via subscription streaming (as oppose to regulating volume via physical discs or VOD).

Do you have Amazon Prime? It's a pretty good deal for streaming plus the free 2-day shipping. Amazon is starting its own original programing. I like the show "betas"

I tend to:

1) Buy the occasional blockbuster (like Star Trek) because I expect to watch it more than once.
2) Use Amazon Prime or iTunes to rent other big movies if necessary.
3) Use Netflicks streaming for my TV show/documentary/art house/older movie needs

What I do think would be smart is if Netflick could create a 2-tiered streaming. In addition to the $7.99/month, I would pay the occasional $1-2 premium to watch certain newer movies.

If you have an internet-ready tv (wifi), you can watch Amazon. We have two TV's and they came preloaded with the Amazon Instant Video Store. If you don't have an internet-ready TV, they really have come way down in price. You might be surprised at how good of a TV you might get. We have a 3rd (older) TV in our guest bedroom which is rarely used and we could not get Roku to work on it.

I subscribe to Netflix and Amazon Prime. (Prime gives you *some* free streaming, as well as free shipping, worth it to me, but you don't have to subscribe to use Amazon Instant Video.) When I want something specific, I first check Netflix, and then check Amazon. Put together, both are cheap, cheaper for me than going to the video store for everything. Both are much more convenient than the store or DVD-by-mail or Red Box -- just dial up what you want to watch when you want to watch it. As a last resort, RCN gives me pretty good on-demand options. All that put together I think gives me excellent selection for not much money.

My main problems with streaming continue to be: (1) my RCN internet speed is usually very strong, but not *always* -- so streaming is more glitch-prone than discs (although scratched discs used to be a periodic problem too); (2) the playback is almost always smooth, even with speed at the margin of what will work, but resolution sometimes self-adjusts to little dips in internet speed, which, if you're sensitive to that, can be annoying -- you want HD all the time, especially if you paid Amazon for an HD rental; (3) you can't search easily -- no fast-forward, rewind, or chapters -- but instead have to guess at where you want to go and then wait for it load, usually overshooting if you want to go back just a little bit to catch something you just missed; (4) no special features, or, at least very few, like a commentary track -- I often enjoy those, but they're pretty much disc-only still.

Kip, I have two Sony wireless internet Blu-Ray players (for different rooms). Both of them link up with both Netflix and Amazon as well as some other non-Apple services I don't use, so I have no need for another box or an internet TV. I bought the latest one pretty recently, so I assume that they still offer Amazon connectivity, and they're pretty cheap.

Many newer televisions have a USB port and by plugging a $35 Google Chromecast dongle (it's a word!) into it, one can access Netflix, Hulu, HBO Go, YouTube or any other streaming content that you can watch via an internet browser.

The Chromecast connects to your home wi-fi network and instead of another remote, you control the Chromecast with your smartphone.

Was back in Chicago for the holidays and noticed that even the newer movies were always available at the Redbox kiosks. Down here in Fort Smith, it's hit or miss. I'm attributing it to infrastructure - there's better, high-capacity fiber and coax in the larger population areas than in the rural areas.

Netflix is virtually unwatchable out in the country where I live. I have to go with their DVD by mail if I want to watch a series

About "Change of Subject."

"Change of Subject" by Chicago Tribune op-ed columnist Eric Zorn contains observations, reports, tips, referrals and tirades, though not necessarily in that order. Links will tend to expire, so seize the day. For an archive of Zorn's latest Tribune columns click here. An explanation of the title of this blog is here. If you have other questions, suggestions or comments, send e-mail to ericzorn at gmail.com.
More about Eric Zorn

Contributing editor Jessica Reynolds is a 2012 graduate of Loyola University Chicago and is the coordinator of the Tribune's editorial board. She can be reached at jreynolds at tribune.com.